Obama: ‘How do they justify this outrage?‘

Obama: ‘How do they justify this outrage?‘

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

President Barack Obama delivered remarks to small business owners, community lenders and members of Congress yesterday. .

» 19 Comments | Post a Comment

WASHINGTON -- Joining a wave of public anger, President Barack Obama attacked insurance giant AIG for "recklessness and greed" yesterday and pledged to try to block it from giving its executives $165 million in bonuses after taking billions in federal bailout money.

"How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?" Obama asked. "This isn't just a matter of dollars and cents. It's about our fundamental values."

Fury was building as well on Capitol Hill, where Virginia 7th District Rep. Eric I. Cantor, the second-ranking member of the House Republican leadership, said in a statement that "Rewarding senior executives who created this mess is nothing short of an outrage."

And New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo told AIG he wanted immediately a list of employees set to receive the bonuses. When it missed his late-afternoon deadline, he issued subpoenas.

Cuomo said his office will investigate whether the employees were involved in the company's near collapse and whether the bonus payments were fraudulent under state law.

Obama aggressively joined in the criticism of American International Group. The bonuses could make it tougher for Obama to ask Congress for more bailout help and jeopardize other parts of the recovery agenda.

The president had scheduled a speech yesterday to announce help for small businesses. But first, he said, he had a few words to say about AIG.

"This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed," Obama said.

He said he had directed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to "pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayer whole."

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said later the administration would modify the terms of a pending $30 billion installment for AIG.

"This is just the kind of issue that galvanizes public outrage," said Paul C. Light, professor of public service at New York University. "They don't know the first thing about credit default swaps. But they do know about bonuses. And it's just the sort of thing that will undermine any future bailout activity."

Bailout steps for AIG totaling more than $170 billion since September effectively have left the federal government with an 80 percent stake in the company. Federal officials moved to save it last fall because they thought its failure would take down the global financial system, since AIG insures the assets of so many major financial institutions.

Pressure was building on the government to rework the AIG bailout to make sure taxpayers are repaid as much of the $170 billion as possible.

So far, the company has been honoring its contracts with U.S. and foreign banks, paying out more than $90 billion in economic-bailout funds to big banks and others. The government agreed to uphold those contracts when it seized control of AIG in September.

Some of the contracts were with firms that had received their own multibillion-dollar government bailouts.

Outcries came from congressional leaders.

"I call upon the executives at AIG to right the wrong they have done to American taxpayers," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said yesterday.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the bonuses "appalling" and said he hoped "the administration gets the message from the taxpayers on this issue."

Virginia's Cantor said, "From the start, Republicans made clear that one of our biggest concerns . . . is the stunning lack of accountability to the taxpayers."

Virginia Rep. Tom Perriello, D-5th, signed a letter to Treasury Secretary Geithner demanding the administration block the AIG bonus payments.

Equating AIG to the auto companies that received government bailout checks, Perriello criticized it for hiding "behind contractual obligations" in paying its bonuses.

"Why is it OK for companies to force cuts on workers but not scale back million-dollar bonuses for the executives who knowingly caused us this mess?" Perriello said.

Democratic Sen. Jim Webb, in a statement, called AIG "out of line."



Neil H. Simon of Media General News Service contributed to this report.

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by L. Johnson on March 17, 2009 at 1:33 pm

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said it best.  It they didn’t get the bailout, the contracts wouldn’t be worth the paper they were printed on!

Flag Comment Posted by Anton Stelly on March 17, 2009 at 12:51 pm

Personally, I am very skeptical that Congress, the Federal Reserve, and the White House are “surprised” by the AIG executive bonuses.

For the government to approve appropriations of this magnitude, one would expect a thorough and exhaustive “due diligence” investigation of the contractual obligations of AIG (including employment contract bonuses for executives)being performed prior to committing any federal bailout funds—if merely to learn whether an infusion of funds would be worthwhile, or merely throwing good money after bad.

I would suggest the media get out its FOIA teams and go after every scrap of paperwork connected to this fiasco. I’ll bet that there is/are a letter, or a memo, or an e-mail showing up to prove that someone in the government suspected, knew, or should have known these bonuses were due prior to the allocation of the funds.

Flag Comment Posted by Dave on March 17, 2009 at 10:23 am

What’s so ‘scary’ or ‘delusional’ about Limbaugh and Coulter? I grant that especially in the case of Coulter she can be in bad taste, but her core beliefs as well as Limbaugh’s are pretty middle of the road. Neither of them are intimidated into ‘make nice’ by liberalism in order to be silenced. Perhaps what’s needed is to call more of the corrupt and incompetent out instead of deferring to them because they have positions of power and influence. Ever notice when the heat is on that we are expected to be ‘non-partisan’ or ‘bi-partisan’? Nope. It’s time to call the corrupt corrupt and the dishonest dishonest. If that is ‘scary’, then there’s not much hope for this country.

Flag Comment Posted by Interested Read on March 17, 2009 at 10:12 am

Maybe we (Congress/President) can’t stop the bonuses, but perhaps what we need to do is deduct the bonus money from any further bail out money they were scheduled to receive.

If the bonus money exceeds next scheduled bailout, then NO more should be given.  Period.  That will stop them dead in their tracks.

Flag Comment Posted by Hate_Richmond on March 17, 2009 at 10:01 am

MotleyFool: I agree with you that this goes beyond party politics. However, there are people who believe otherwise and think that everything that Democrats is bad and everything Republicans are good. Rushies and Coulterists are a scary, delusional bunch.

Flag Comment Posted by MotleyFool on March 17, 2009 at 9:22 am

I’m glad to see the government taking AIG to task over this. I don’t know what contracts were written but these men should not receive bonuses. No matter what the contract said it’s just not right.

Talk about a government hand out. This goes beyond Republicans and Democrats here.

I’m glad to see so much action and outrage over this. We’ll have to wait and see how this pans out from a legal perspective.

Flag Comment Posted by james on March 17, 2009 at 8:17 am

It’s not about being justified. The bonuses are written into the contracts. They must be paid or AIG is in breach of contract. And all the idiots on Capitol Hill, on both sides, are going along with the “outrage” to try to win votes—as usual.

Since AIG is a nationalized company, what Congress should do is fire all the top execs, except the new CEO who is working for free and did not write one of the contracts in question. But they realize they’ll score more political points by whining about something they can do nothing about.

If the federal government can prevent bonuses written into valid and binding contracts from being paid, it sets a horrific precedent for companies doing things the right way that pay these kinds of bonuses because it means the government can cancel all their bonuses as well. It’s socialism run amok.

These bonuses have to be paid. Then each employee who accepts the bonus should be fired for cause and receive no severance.

Flag Comment Posted by sclark on March 17, 2009 at 8:13 am

How do Frank, Rangel and Obama justify the automatic pay raises that Congress got last January.  They are the ones that started this mess.  Where is the outrage.  Somebody call Pelosi on her airforce jet.

Flag Comment Posted by Dave on March 17, 2009 at 7:06 am

How? Simple. Congress passed a TARP with no strings attached. Oh, and before we start the ‘Bush bash’, Obama’s Treasury Secre. Geithner was instrumental in all this last fall as a go-between. Speaking of outrage, what about Barney Franks, Charly Rangel and so many others who have gotten a free pass despite the fact that they aided and abetted in creating this whole sorry mess. Stop the grandstanding, Obama. It is not a substitute for leadership.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement